The upsets aren't the point, and they're a lot harder to come by in football anyway. The point is that college football's regular season is about to lose its relevance, just as college basketball's regular season has.
Footbal is too demanding physically, and any other way, to have meaningless games, and that's what most of them will be in a 24-team format with four-loss teams qualifying. And the football in the 12-team playoff has not been that good.
The four-team playoff was the best because it had teams that had perfect or near-perfect regular seasons and had braved that gauntlet. You could argue that other teams (Florida State in 2024) deserved to be in the Four, but you couldn't argue that any of the Four didn't belong. You didn't have a talented team like Miami which didn't show up for Louisville and SMU and got into the field anyway.
If they do have a 24-team field, two things will eventually happen. There will be a 32-team field. And there will be players who will be held out of Ohio State-Michigan and Alabama-Auburn games to ensure their health for the playoff. The rivalries that have sustained college football willl be diluted, and the ability of the fan bases to attend all these games scattered around the country will be depleted. That's not good for the sport, no matter how much money is generated.
Really good column. Really fine points. College football -- all college sports -- has very little to do with "college" anymore. Campuses are just locations of the games, and in basketball the athletes sometimes elect to take less money and go pro so they don't have to darken a classroom (much less earn a degree). In football playoffs, I am for 24 teams, but I'm also for the full elimination of conferences. I'm for 16 10-team geographic regions that play down to seed a playoff bracket with their champions. Full round-robin schedules and a regional title game! Eight runners-up would get at-large bids and play to seed the bracket. Everybody gets the same chance. No polls. No uneven scheduling. No traveling across country to play games just for TV (and fewer missed classes LOL). You can double the process for basketball. It works. It's fun. It makes sense. It wouldn't happen in my grandchildren's lifetimes.
As a Oregon fan, and you pointed it out, to follow the Ducks if they went to the final, I would have had to fly from Portland to Miami and back, Portland to Atlanta and back, Portland to Miami and back. Of course that's not counting game tickets (which are reaching four digits for just one), hotels (priced at a premium), meals, and $30 beers at the venue.
I skipped the first Miami game and flew to Atlanta for the semi-final Peach Bowl with a break-the- bank Miami trip if they won. We all know that didn't happen so it saved me money. But to think that most fans can afford even one of those trips, let alone three is fantasy.
As much as I advocated that the players should be paid, I did not foresee the torrent of unintended consequences. But I must say the quality of play at least in basketball has improved, with all these older players. And Indiana's football season was absolutely masterful, again with a lot of transfers.
Notre Dame still paying for their infamous tie one for the Gipper game vs Michigan State back in the 60s.
Well said. Loved this line-....more replicas of the White House ballroom must be built on campus to keep the industry thriving.
We’ve disagreed on this before, so at the risk of redundancy I offer this:
When the hoops tourney yields a 13 seed defeating a four, it’s a Cinderella story. When a middling major boots a 1-loss behemoth, it’s a travesty.
I don’t care who wins the SEC title game. Sorry. Same with Big Ten.
I just like watching good football, which you’ve shown most of these game to be.
And now that they’re all getting paid, it should only get better.
If it’s the monevball network race that has you down, I’m with you. But the four-team format didn’t solve much for me.
The upsets aren't the point, and they're a lot harder to come by in football anyway. The point is that college football's regular season is about to lose its relevance, just as college basketball's regular season has.
Footbal is too demanding physically, and any other way, to have meaningless games, and that's what most of them will be in a 24-team format with four-loss teams qualifying. And the football in the 12-team playoff has not been that good.
The four-team playoff was the best because it had teams that had perfect or near-perfect regular seasons and had braved that gauntlet. You could argue that other teams (Florida State in 2024) deserved to be in the Four, but you couldn't argue that any of the Four didn't belong. You didn't have a talented team like Miami which didn't show up for Louisville and SMU and got into the field anyway.
If they do have a 24-team field, two things will eventually happen. There will be a 32-team field. And there will be players who will be held out of Ohio State-Michigan and Alabama-Auburn games to ensure their health for the playoff. The rivalries that have sustained college football willl be diluted, and the ability of the fan bases to attend all these games scattered around the country will be depleted. That's not good for the sport, no matter how much money is generated.
Really good column. Really fine points. College football -- all college sports -- has very little to do with "college" anymore. Campuses are just locations of the games, and in basketball the athletes sometimes elect to take less money and go pro so they don't have to darken a classroom (much less earn a degree). In football playoffs, I am for 24 teams, but I'm also for the full elimination of conferences. I'm for 16 10-team geographic regions that play down to seed a playoff bracket with their champions. Full round-robin schedules and a regional title game! Eight runners-up would get at-large bids and play to seed the bracket. Everybody gets the same chance. No polls. No uneven scheduling. No traveling across country to play games just for TV (and fewer missed classes LOL). You can double the process for basketball. It works. It's fun. It makes sense. It wouldn't happen in my grandchildren's lifetimes.
As a Oregon fan, and you pointed it out, to follow the Ducks if they went to the final, I would have had to fly from Portland to Miami and back, Portland to Atlanta and back, Portland to Miami and back. Of course that's not counting game tickets (which are reaching four digits for just one), hotels (priced at a premium), meals, and $30 beers at the venue.
I skipped the first Miami game and flew to Atlanta for the semi-final Peach Bowl with a break-the- bank Miami trip if they won. We all know that didn't happen so it saved me money. But to think that most fans can afford even one of those trips, let alone three is fantasy.
As much as I advocated that the players should be paid, I did not foresee the torrent of unintended consequences. But I must say the quality of play at least in basketball has improved, with all these older players. And Indiana's football season was absolutely masterful, again with a lot of transfers.